Give Reagan Credit

THE MAJORITY opinion overlooks much of what has actually happened in Central America over the past six years. Consider the last two years of the Carter Administration--El Salvador descended into a bloody civil war a revolution in Nicaragua was followed by a ruthless purging of non-Sandinista revolutionaries, and the resultant junta set out to militarize the Nicaraguan people on a soul never before seen in Central America, except possible in Soviet-supported Cuba. Considering the last four years in comparison. We are extremely skeptical of the flippant dismissal of the Reagan approach as "peace destroying.

Pehaps the most curious desire of many American liberals has been to negotiate with the Sandinista regime at all costs; without a matching concern for the outcome of any such talks or the welfare of the Central American people. It seems that Americans have forgotten that the original 1979 Nicaraguan revolution against the rightly-hated Somoza regime was broadly-based. Its leadership reflected this pluralism. The Carter Administration aided the ruling junta because it wanted to help such a multifaceted uprising.

But the Marxist Sandinistas repudiated the spirit of the Carter help, purged the junta of all non-Sandinista elements, and proceeded to indoctrinate their people with Marxist ideology and excessive militarism. The oft-cited progress toward literacy in Nicaragua loses its luster in such a context; we doubt the value of reading when all printed materials are controlled by a totalitarian regime.

Carter's approach to the Sandinistas failed to help the Nicaraguans achieve the kind of freedom for which so many of them fought and died. By contrast, Reagan's alleged "bristling militarism" and "single-minded devotion to force and bluster" have apparently induced the Sandinistas to at least go through the motions of an election and begin reform. The effect of U.S. pressure in prompting elections is obvious: in the first place, the Sandinistas' Marxist ideology denies the usefulness and even the possibility for real elections. And in the second place, any group with such a hold on all sources of power is unlikely voluntarily to endanger its rule at the polls. Similarly with the trumpeted acceptance of the Contadora draft treaty--why should the Sandinistas accept any outside limitations on their support of El Salvadoran rebels solely out of the goodness of their hearts? In both cases, it is American-backed military pressure, not talks, which has pushed the Sandinistas, however slightly, toward both peace and pluralism.

In El Salvador the case for Reagan progress is even more clear. True, there has been a horribly bloody civil war there for the past five years and American policy there historically has not helped the cause of peace or reform, but there is no guarantee that a different Reagan policy would have changed this for the better. What cannot be doubted is that U.S. backing of the regime, coupled with pressure to curb the "deathsquads" and improve social and political conditions, gave the Salvadorans the margin of time they needed to avoid both a right-wing authoritarianism and a far more permanent left-wing totalitarianism. Just this week we are witnessing the long-awaited fruit of American resolve in the first meeting between the government and the rebels since 1979, yet the majority opinion gives no credit to Reagan's so-called "blustering militarism" for this outcome.

In any sober analysis the case against U.S. Central American policy since 1980 must be qualified extensively, and in fact the Reagan record should stand the test of time extremely well. Economic aid to the region triples the amount of military aid. The Caribbean Basin Initiative of 1982 holds out additional economic hope for the nations of the region. Even Cuba seems to offer the possibility for rapprochement. Against such a record the constant liberal clamor for talks loses cogency. Why talk with someone who has no reason to listen? Ronald Reagan and his Administration have provided forceful incentive for both the Sandinistas and the Salvadoran right to sit up and pay attention.